Suffer the little children

The press is all over Israel’s missile strike that killed children. Fortunately, LGF is all over the fact that Israel, unlike any aggressor in the history of the world, warned civilians days in advance that the strike was coming and begged them to leave. The reason Israel was striking that area was not to kill civilians, but because it was a Hezbollah stronghold. Hezbollah, true to its belief-system, was using those civilians for the twofold purpose of preventing an Israeli strike in the first place or, failing that, using the strike as a public relations event — something our credulous, ill-informed media is only too will to help with. (Note: I’m being nice when I assign stupidity to the media for its reporting here, rather than the malice that I think motivates so much of the reporting from European outlets, from AP and from Reuters.)

Talking to Technorati: , , ,

About these ads

25 Responses

  1. Here was my post on this subect on http://www.israellycool.com about an hour ago:

    UPDATE: The IDF has released a film clip which shows Hezbollah firing rockets from a building which is very similar to the one which was bombed in Qana. From what I have seen, it is not conclusively established that it is THE building, but it would not surprise me at all if it were. Hezbollah is nothing if not smart. This is a true “win, win” for them. Either they get to continue launching rockets at Israel without interruption, or Israel kills a bunch of children. It’s good PR for them either way. The world reaction to what has happened is ample proof of this fact.

    Here is what Israel needs to do: It IMMEDIATELY needs for Olmert to call a press conference, and to show this video. He needs to in no uncertain terms be able to link this building to the firing of rockets into Israel. And, he needs to pointedly direct remarks to France, Russia, Spain, and the rest of the dhimmi-loving countries of Western Europe to ask them if they would put up with this. Will he do it? Of course not, but it is what needs to be done.

    The bottom line to me: Israel has already lost this latest war, unfortunately…………..

  2. Israel is expected to fight without a single civilian casualty, despite the fact that its enemies hide amongst and behind civilians, and shoot off rockets next to civilians. The more I watch world reaction the more convinced I am that if you are not with Israel, you are with Hezbollah. The reason so many atrocities are committed in an indifferent world, and Israel fights in self-defense to world-wide condemnation is age old Jew hatred of the most basic kind. I am disgusted, but not surprised by senseless Arab hatred, and, of course, the European response. Europe is as it ever was.

  3. American Thinker quotes the best defender of Israel I know, Benjamin Netanyahu, rebutting the BBC: (link below)

    ‘Netanyahu compared the situation to the British Royal Air Force’s fight against the Nazis in World War II. He said that when the RAF targeted the Gestapo headquarters in Copenhagen in 1944, they missed and hit a children’s hospital, but “that didn’t make the British pilots terrorists and it didn’t make the Nazis the good guys.”‘

    Perhaps the discussion here has hit on this idea: Hezb’s agression is part of a pre arranged Iranian campaign to muddy world opinion and thus lay the groundwork for war against Israel and world wide terror attacks. A divided West/UN never never found the consensus to fight Saddam. NOr will they, Iran.. or so the mullahs gamble.
    —-

    http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=5698

  4. Pictures Showing The Cowardly Hezbollah

    So we are to believe it took the Lebanese 6 hours to get help to this building? Or did they wait for it to collapse for a better media event?
    My bet is on option 2.

  5. The only help I can see for this kind of BS is to make it absolutely shameful for the terrorists to hide behind the skirts of women and children. That used to be a major disgrace in the Arabic culture, who are, after all, a machismo-oriented group who once had strict standards about how “real men” fight. But Yassir Arafat deleted this general more’ from modern Arabic culture by hiding the PLO amongst the Palestinian refugees back in the ’60s and having enormous success in attacking Israel from the Golan Heights. The sheer practicality of his approach eventually won the approval of those inclined toward terrorism in Arabic society in general.

    This is Arafat’s legacy to the human race :(.

    If we could get ahold of the traditionalists among the Muslim societies and make them see what is happening, we might have a chance to beat this kind of BS once and for all.

    It would require swamping the various Islamic nations with information, though, and that is the problem. Most of them have complete control over the media.

    But if someone could get to the conscience of people in an organization like al Jazeera with it’s world-wide coverage, there might be a chance.

  6. Israel really shouldn’t be doing that. Warning civilians that is. If I was a terroist, what I would do is frog march a bunch of kids to the spot, and have them play Pallywood with cameras. That way you know…. good stuff can result for me, the terroist.

    Israel acts like the robot fighter, everything they do I can predict ahead of time and take advantage of. I do not recommend such a fighting style to anyone. Unless of course, you’re in a martial arts competition and you know the other guy will always obey the rules, then sure, I’ll recommend robotic fighting.

    If we could get ahold of the traditionalists among the Muslim societies and make them see what is happening, we might have a chance to beat this kind of BS once and for all.

    Sorry, not going to work. The only way the traditionalists would resist, is if we actually made them feel shameful about hiding behind women and children. There are ways, but they won’t be used.

    It would require swamping the various Islamic nations with information, though, and that is the problem. Most of them have complete control over the media.

    Bomb the networks. Raid a broadcasting center, take over the air waves. Too unscientific for Israel? Probably. In the propaganda war, the ability for the enemy to broadcast is THE logistical gordian knot that if cut, will starve them on the vine.

    It would be better to work on their shame, they don’t have a conscience. They don’t feel guilty because they like winning. And they win by making the West out to be killing their women and children, that the Arab world routinely abuses and beats. They don’t care what happens to their children or their women. They do care about what they can do to Israel if women and children are harmed however.

    Iraq has given us one solution. Open confessions on camera. Israel didn’t release all their terroists, yet, have they? I would add “execution via pig meat coated impalement” on video as well, but they might not have the stomach to tolerate that.

  7. http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/07/on_friday_betha.html

    People should read that for more background info on Islamic consciences and psychology. You won’t get as much without some psychological background, but hey, that doesn’t mean in the future everything won’t just snap into place.

  8. “War is for everyone, children too”–Robert Frost.
    I may not have the quote exactly right, but you get the idea.
    Why are people more upset about Israel’s killing Muslim children that about Muslims’ killing their OWN children in order to murder others?

  9. Well Trish, it’s kind of due to the fact that Israel scores a zero in propaganda ability while the Palestinians score at least a 50/100.

  10. “The reason so many atrocities are committed in an indifferent world, and Israel fights in self-defense to world-wide condemnation is age old Jew hatred of the most basic kind.”

    This is complete nonsense. Jew hatred has nothing to do with it. It has to do with the fact that Israel has refused to recognize the basic human rights of the Palestinians for decades and kills them on a ratio of 9:1 out of so-called “self-defense,” which, in reality, is disproportionate aggression, here and in other cases.

  11. Clint, you must read the truth from Seattle.
    Here it is, in plain and unavoidable language (link below orig. from Am.Digest)

    “So Seattle is already tying itself into a pretzel thinking of excuses for this latest, hometown Jihadist evil. Listen to the crud building up around the story: This man had a criminal record. (So it’s the fault now of the police who arrested him before?) He was from Pakistan but “an American Citizen.” (So his hatreds and violence became our responsibility when he deceived us into naturalizing him?) He “may have had a personal grievance.”..

    “.. No amount of intellectual conjuring will convince rational people that this was an isolated act.

    For years the Jihadists have told us in plain language that we must submit or die. They relentlessly spew forth their hatred of Jews and Christians. They proved in New York, Paris, Madrid, London, Bali, Bombay and hundreds of other places, that they mean to kill us all as soon and as painfully as they can.”
    —-

    http://moosefeathers.typepad.com/askmom/2006/07/its_just_a_few_.html

  12. Hi Clint,

    Have the Palestinians recognized the basic human rights of the Israelis? The truth is that the Palestinians are set on destroying Israel completely (they say so openly, so you can hardly deny it) and no amount of recognition of human rights or anything Israel can do will change that. The truth is that the Palestinians, by randomly lobbing rockets toward Israeli civilian areas and by intentionally using human bombs, car bombs, etc. in an attempt to maximize Israeli CIVILIAN deaths do far more than merely deny their human rights.

    What would you have Israel do? Would you have them allow the Palestinians to bomb them without retaliation? Would you have them allow their soldiers to be kidnapped without retaliation? You are fast with the accusations against Israel, but have not, that I have seen, offered any alternatives.

    I am neither Jewish nor Muslim; I am a non-believing Christian. But I see a country fighting desperately to preserve its own existence against an enemy sworn to destroy it. I see a country that does everything it can to avoid civilian deaths versus an enemy that targets civilians, and openly so. I see a country that seeks to protect its civilians against an enemy that hides behind its civilians. I see a country that raises its children to value human life against an enemy that raises its children to be human bombs. What do you see that would make you support that enemy?

  13. Jg,
    What does that have to do with anything?

    Quixote,
    “The truth is that the Palestinians are set on destroying Israel completely (they say so openly, so you can hardly deny it) and no amount of recognition of human rights or anything Israel can do will change that.”

    Some Palestinians are, yes. As are some Israelis – they just have bigger guns. I notice you don’t deny that Israel is violating their human rights.

    “What would you have Israel do? Would you have them allow the Palestinians to bomb them without retaliation? Would you have them allow their soldiers to be kidnapped without retaliation? You are fast with the accusations against Israel, but have not, that I have seen, offered any alternatives.”

    First of all, the facts of this current wave of violence show that the first abduction was of two Gaza civilians by Israeli forces — this is not self-defense. Second, I would have Israel return the thousands of illegally held Palestinian prisoners. Third, I would have Israel, at the very least, respect the borders laid out in the original agreement. Fourth, I would have Israel respect the human rights of the Palestinians. Fifth, I would destroy the wall in the West Bank. Sixth, I would have Israel recognize the democratically elected government of Hamas and negotiate a two-state settlement.

  14. Hi Clint,

    Thanks for the reply. Would you have the Palestinians respect the human rights of the Israelis? How can Israel negotiate a two-state settlement with Hamas when Hamas openly rejects the notion of a two-state settlement? Israel would be thrilled with a two-state settlement that would ensure it peaceful borders. The problem is that its enemies won’t even consider it. To say that Israel should negotiate a two-state settlement is to turn the matter on its head. That’s all Israel has ever wanted.

    By the way the term two-state settlement is a loaded one; Israel wants only one state while its enemies already have many states. As Bookworm pointed out, hundreds of thousands of displaced Jews were absorbed into Israel. It is not Israel’s fault that the Arab states have refused to absorb the Palestinians or that the Palestinians have continued to work ceaselessly to destroy Israel.

    Which leads me to your point about holding Palistinian prisoners “illegally”. Israel only holds Palestinians for one reason — preservation of its state and its people. If someone is sworn to kill you and you have a chance to stop him, are you really going to let him go get his gun because, gee, it would be “illegal” to stop him from killing you. Israel is the victim of thousands of terrorist attacks, and your suggestion that it should simply sit passively and let itself be attacked (without imprisoning the attackers) is a classic blame-the-victim move.

    I asked you what you would have Israel do and, to your credit, you told me. You would have them free the individuals who are sworn to destroy them, recognize the organization that is sworn to destroy them, and respect the human rights of those who have no respect for their human rights. Let me just say that I respectfully disagree with this strategy and believe that if Israel followed your advice it would be destroyed outright, not an outcome I am willing to support.

  15. It has to do with the fact that Israel has refused to recognize the basic human rights of the Palestinians for decades and kills them on a ratio of 9:1 out of so-called “self-defense,” which, in reality, is disproportionate aggression, here and in other cases.

    I’ve seen disproportionate aggression. Disproportionate aggression is where if one of your guys die, 1,000 of theirs are executed. The Romans loved that technique. In fact, one time a rebelling province strung a few Romans up on the road, and the entire province got crucified. Maybe 10,000 to 100,000 people for a few Romans dead. Clint here is trying to tell me that he knows more about disproportionate aggression than I do, Clint’s at a small disadvantage here.

    Some Palestinians are, yes. As are some Israelis – they just have bigger guns. I notice you don’t deny that Israel is violating their human rights.

    7/10 to 9/10 Palestinian children hate Israel and do not know any Israelis. Maybe 2/10 Israeli children hate Palestine. Some Palestinians like Israeli citizens and disagree with Zionism, some Israelis are hardliners against Palestine.

    Does anyone understand that if the Romans could crucify an entire province in return for a few Roman deaths, what they would have done had they had Israeli technology? Think about it. Then listen to Clint’s beliefs that 9 to 1 ratios are disproportionate. It’s all about knowledge and wisdom, i.e. perspective.

    Second, I would have Israel return the thousands of illegally held Palestinian prisoners.

    I agree, give them what they want, send them to Allah. True believers deserve the reward of Heaven.

    Clint, you didn’t get anything I said about fundamental truths, deductive logic, and inductive logic, correct?

  16. Clint….

    re: “Some Palestinians are, yes. As are some Israelis – they just have bigger guns. I notice you don’t deny that Israel is violating their human rights.

    That is the official policy of Palestinian leadership, and has been all along. All maps of “Palestine” which have been created by Palestinian officialdom are completely without Israel. Although some Israelis may have an agenda to destroy the Palestinians, that is NOT the official policy of Israel.

    Your second paragraph is so full of propaganda that it would be useless to fisk it item by item.

    The bottom line is that Palestinian leadership has an official policy of destroying Israel and always has, and Israeli leadership has an official policy of peaceful coexistance and always has.

  17. I just read Clint’s comment on my site, I’ll reply to him there. But I will say that I got my question answered. Clint did understand what I was saying, however he doesn’t agree. Oh well, I was hoping for one of those mass conversion thingamabobes, but I guess it didn’t happen *sighs*

  18. Hi again Clint,

    I forgot to comment on your alleged Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights. I do not know what specific violations you are referring to, so I cannot comment intelligently on your claim, but I do know that whatever the Israelis are doing pales in comparison to the beheadings, torture, and abuse that their enemies brag about inflicting on their captives. You made the point previously that we should hold ourselves and our allies to a very high standard, and I agree with that. But why shouldn’t we (and, most especially, why shouldn’t the supposedly neutral international community reflected in Amnesty International, the International Red Cross, the UN, etc.) hold our enemies to an equally high standard?

  19. I would have the UN hold both sides to an incredibly high standard. I think that, more or less, that’s being done. It only makes sense that Israel, as the larger, more powerful entity, will be committing more crimes and inflicting more damage (unless we want to continue pretending that Palestinians are just down right evil people who want to kill and Israelis are just normal humans who want to live in peace, blah blah blah).

    And yes, I would hope the Palestinians would respect the human rights of the Israelis.

    The part about the two-state settlement is nonsense. The US/Israel have repeatedly blocked negotiations on this and insisted on agreements where Palestinians would be further put in “cantons” and denied basic resources and rights to the people. Know your history.

  20. Hi Clint,

    It is undeniable that the Palestinians have sworn to destroy Israel utterly. Oddly, you don’t even mention or acknowledge this. If a man comes to my door with a gun and says he is here to kick me out of my house do I invite him in, sit him at my table, serve him coffee and suggest we talk about it? Heck no, I go get my own gun.

    I admit I an unfamiliar with your “history.” Please provide links and evidence of your statement that US/Israel have blocked negotiations. How does your view square with Israel unilaterally giving Gaza to the Palestinians and withdrawing from Lebanon? How does your two-state solution come to terms with the fact that the Arabs already have many states and the vast majority of the territory, while Israel has barely a little sliver of a country?

    I respect that you have answered my questions calmly and without name-calling but it is hard to take seriously someone who says the UN is holding Israel’s enemies to anything like the standard that it is holding Israel. You must know that the UN’s condemnation of Israel is disproportionate and its condemnation of its enemies mild at best.

    I’m enjoying our exchanges and hope they continue, but I’m at a loss to understand your view. The Palestinians and their allies have made no secret of their desire to destory Israel utterly. They have displayed for the world to see their abuse of prisoners and taken pride in beheadings and torture. They target civilians as their main mode of operation. In short, they do far worse than anything you could possibly accuse Israel of, and brag about it. Yet your entire focus is on condemning Israel and ignoring the acts of their enemies. It’s as if a driver is shooting a gun at other drivers and you want to go after the other drivers for speeding while ignoring the guy with the gun. Israel may, or may not, be doing everything we would want a perfectly civilized nation to do, but its actions so pale in comparison to the actions of its enemies that the focus should be on the enemies, not on Israel.

    And, by the way, there is no question that the Palestinians raise their children to kill themselves and civilians as human bombs and there is no question that Israel would quite happily allow their neighbors to live in peace if their neighbors gave up the idea of trying to destroy Israel. That’s not pretend; that’s the truth, and if the Palestinians don’t believe it they should put it to the test by acknowledging Israel’s right to exist and promising not to either rocket attack or bomb Israel again. They don’t have to disarm or give up anything on the ground. They just have to quit attacking Israel and Israel’s right to exist. If Israel does not respond in kind and immediately seek a two-state solution (or, more properly, a one Israeli state-yet one more Arab state solution) I will join in your view of the Israelis. But I’m quite confident that would not happen.

  21. Clint: I know my history and I know that, working with Clinton, Ehud Barak offered Arafat more than 90% of what he demanded in negotiations. Arafat, rather than saying “yes” or negotiating further, walked away. That was the end of the peace process. I also know that the Palestianians, when they’re not talking to credulous people in the West, but are actually talking to each other, have repeated that they have no interest in the two state solution, but want to see Israel driven into the sea. Look at their Arabic language statements, look at their maps, look at their textbooks, look at the PLO charter, and look at the Hamas charter. In the Palestinian/Hamas mind, this is a zero sum negotiation that ends with the Jews — whom the Arabs politely call pigs and monkeys — dead.

  22. Bookworm,
    Nonsense. I am going to quote some Chomsky here, bear with me.

    “Miller carries the story on in the same vein, leading to the standard denouement: at Camp David, Arafat “walked away” from the magnanimous Clinton-Barak offer of peace, and even afterwards refused to join Barak in accepting Clinton’s December 2000 “parameters”, thus proving conclusively that he insists on violence, a depressing truth with which the peace-loving states, the US and Israel, must somehow come to terms.

    Turning to actual history, the Camp David proposals divided the West Bank into virtually separated cantons, and could not possibly be accepted by any Palestinian leader. That is evident from a look at the maps that were easily available, but not in the NYT, or apparently anywhere in the US mainstream, perhaps for that reason. After the collapse of these negotiations, Clinton recognised that Arafat’s reservations made sense, as demonstrated by the famous “parameters”, which, though vague, went much further towards a possible settlement — thus undermining the official story, but that’s only logic, therefore as unacceptable as history.”

    The Palestinians used these parameters as “the basis for further efforts” at Taba. Eventually, those negotiations were called off by Barak.

    Don Quixote,
    I am not blind to the fact that the Palestinians are despicable as well and I’ll readily condemn them. However, I believe they are the victims in this drama and, like I said before, what difference does it make if I condemn them. I should be doing something, first and foremost, about the crimes I am responsible for.

    More from the article I quoted above…

    “That has been clear ever since January 1976, when Syria introduced a resolution to the UN Security Council calling for a two-state settlement. The resolution incorporated the crucial wording of UN 242 — the basic document, all agree. It accorded to Israel the rights of any state in the international system, alongside of a Palestinian state in the territories Israel had conquered in 1967. The resolution was vetoed by the US.”

    “Meanwhile the NYT refused — the word is accurate — to publish the fact that through the 1980s, Arafat was calling for negotiations which Israel rejected. The Israeli mainstream press would run headlines about Arafat’s call for direct negotiations with Israel, rejected by Shimon Peres on the basis of his doctrine that Arafat’s PLO “cannot be a partner to negotiations”

    “This is only a small fragment of a diplomatic record that is so consistent, and so dramatically clear, that it is impossible to miss — unless one keeps rigidly to the history shaped by those who own it.”

  23. Clint: Was it you who refused to read anything by Horowitz (even though Horowitz did not, in fact, write the document to which I referred)? Well, Chomsky has no credibility for me. Aside from that, as DQ has repeatedly pointed out, you are obsessively focused on Israel and refuse to discuss the role the actions of Palestinians and the Arab states had in their ending up in the situations they now face. Is Israel the only actor? Please discuss Muslims, Arabs, Persians, Palestinians, etc.

  24. Bookworm,
    David Horowitz is essentially sponsoring that article on the sidebar. Whereas Chomsky focuses on issues, cites facts and is considered “the most important intellectual alive” (a phrase coined by the newspaper he criticizes the most), Horowitz specializes in attacking those who disagree with him.

    I’m looking at a Horowitz article right now called “The Sick Mind of Noam Chomsky” where he calls him “devious” “dishonest” a “treacherous intellect” an “instructor” of hate, says he “despises” the nation, claims he’s aiding Bin Laden and Hussein and Communists — all in the first two paragraphs! This guy is a joke and not a respectable or credible source. His comments, which seem to be mostly personal attacks, wouldn’t even be allowed on most blogs.

  25. I got a question for Don Quixote. Why don’t you understand Clint’s view since he’s already told you, and I’ve already described it, that his beliefs derive from a utilitarian perspective? Do you have trouble correlating utilitarianism to how his perspective works or something?

    I hate to break it to clint, but one of the best spy tricks is to have two organizations, apparently hate the guts of each other, when in fact they are working together very closely and sharing intelligence. This way, if one organization criticizes the other organization, they raise their credibility without expending much energy. However, when one organization is in a bind, and there is no other help, then some nice complimentary things said by the OTHER organization is a BOON that will save the first organization where nothing else will.

    It’s the backup lifeline plan. A very simple 2 step program that requires some time to set up, but can be run more or less with zero maintenance. Chomsky knows the basics of propaganda. So it would be wise for him to criticize a newspaper, and then have that newspaper say something positive about it, and people like Clint will use it as a reason to believe fervently in Chomsky. Quite effective for a low maintenance operation, if I may say so myself.

    I am not blind to the fact that the Palestinians are despicable as well and I’ll readily condemn them.

    Hey Don, don’t you find it interesting that Clint finds a group of people despicable but he also feels some sympathy and pity for them? Disproportionate to what he feels for Israel, as well.

    That is a very nice effect of Chomsky’s propaganda. The best lies are those that the target comes up for himself. Allow the target to make most of the assumptions. Allow the target to believe his beliefs are his own, and not created by my or Chomsky’s manipulations.

    When you do that, you can get someone to despise Palestine, but that doesn’t mean you still won’t get from him what you wanted in the first place. Don’t bother trying to convince people Palestinians are perfect, just focus on what is worse.

    And yes, I would hope the Palestinians would respect the human rights of the Israelis.

    The despicable Palestinians (in Clint’s words) are going to respect the human rights of the pig Jews? Come on. You forget who reads these comments.

    It only makes sense that Israel, as the larger, more powerful entity, will be committing more crimes and inflicting more damage (unless we want to continue pretending that Palestinians are just down right evil people who want to kill and Israelis are just normal humans who want to live in peace, blah blah blah).

    It is too bad nobody challenged me when I made the original comment, answering Don’s questions to clint, in which I described the above in more or less detail. I had already stated the proposition that the answer to Don’s question is utilitarianism. The belief that Israel can and does kill more people than the terroists. Doesn’t it make sense that Israel, as the larger, more powerful entity, actually will be committing more crimes and inflicting more damage, eh don?

    ALmost a mirror of what I said. Predicting people is getting easier and easier. I wish there would be a higher challenge. Here’s the comment where I replied to Don’s question to Clint.

    http://bookwormroom.wordpress.com/2006/07/31/suffer-the-children-part-ii/#comment-7212

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: